View source for A System of Systems Methodology



The starting point was a classification of problem- contexts according to:
# The nature of the systems(s) embedding the problem of concern
# The relationship between relevant stakeholders

. Systems were seen to lie on a continuum ranging from simple to complex and, following Ackoff's terminology, problem-contexts labelled 'mechanical' if they contained relatively simple systems and 'systemic' if they housed complex systems. Decision-makers could be in a 

* Unitary relationship to one another If they agreed upon a set of goals
* Pluralist If their objectives differed. 


Problem-contexts, it followed, could also exhibit a 'unitary' or 'pluralist' character. Bringing the two dimensions of 'systems' and 'decision- makers' together, to form a four-celled matrix, yielded a classification of problem-contexts as mechanical-unitary, systemic-unitary, mechanical-pluralist and systemic-pluralist. Some brief justifi- cation was provided for the choice of the two dimensions forming the matrix.

{| class="wikitable" style="width: 100%;"
|-
! scope="col"|
! scope="col" style="width: 50%"| Unitary
! scope="col" style="width: 50%"| Pluralist
|-
! scope="row"| Mechanical
|
* Assumes that it is relatively easy to establish clear objectives for the system in which the problem resides, so the context must be unitary.
* The system is represented in a quantitative model which simulates its performance under different operational conditions something only possible if the system is simple and the context mechanical.
* Classical OR Systems analysis and systems engineering are most appropriate for solving problems.
| Mechanical-pluralist contexts responded to the kind of systems design method proposed by Churchman, and by Mason and Mitroff in their 'strategic assumption surfacing and testing' methodology.
|-
! scope="row"| Systemic
| Cybernetic approaches, such as advocated by Beer and in the socio-technical systems literature.
| The soft systems thinking proposed by Ackoff and by Checkland could minister to problems set in systemic-pluralist problem-contexts. For example, Ackoff's 'interactive planning' exhibited, through the participative principle, a method to cope with pluralism and, through the proposed design for a 'responsive decision system', an attempt to come to terms with systemicity.
|}